Talk:Stoicism

Stoicism was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 31, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
November 5, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic / Ethics / Ancient High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic
	Ethics
	Ancient philosophy

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 20, 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

HypnoSynthesis (talk · contribs)

Removing uncited claims and original research

There's a whole lot in this article that isn't supported by any secondary sources. It seems as if some editors may have read the extant works on Stoicism and arrived at their own original conclusions. I'm going through the article and removing anything that is not supported by a secondary, scholarly source. There are no shortage of academic sources covering Stoicism, we should have an article that represents the academic consensus rather than risk introducing some new age interpretations or self-help literature.

This article has a long way to go to meet the good article criteria despite being marked as such - the Stoics made highly structured divisions of their philosophy into Logic, Physics, and Ethics with highly structured subdivisions of each, this is nowhere to be found on this article. There's also almost no history of the movement and how it developed, or discussion of any of the influences it exerted over medieval or modern philosophy. - car chasm (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the transformation of this article by your hand. 182.239.146.18 (talk) 14:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Misrepresentation

The section referencing influence on Christianity claims both systems assert fundamental human depravity. That isn't true of Stoicism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8C0:980:E520:949E:36AD:30D4:9503 (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptance of Anaxagoras' claim

As a subtopic in the categories section, there is a claim that "stoics accept the anaxagoras notion that when an object becomes red, it is because an universal redness has entered the body". I would doubt that claim considering that stoics themselves deny the existence of most universals as bodies (as a warning, i am not a stoic expert, so maybe i'm wrong in this claim, but it seems contradictory). Also, the claim is unlinked, so I would appreciate if someone links it to the direct source (which I couldn't find too, since the main sources never say this, though I couldn't read all the sources so maybe the source is there somewhere. Any way, it would be nice to link it). 181.97.174.141 (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

There is uncited text throughout the article.
There are sources listed in "Further reading" that are not used as inline citations. These should be used as-such or removed.

Is anyone willing to fix up this article, or should it be nominated to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 08:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Stoicism

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is uncited text in the article, including entire paragraphs. There are several sources listed in "Further reading" and some sections that are only one paragraph long: this makes me think that the article might not cover all major aspects of the topic, but would appreciate if a subject-matter expert can comment on that concern. Z1720 (talk) 17:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.